by definition a miracle can never happen. discuss.

Authors Avatar

By definition a miracle can never happen. Discuss

There are many different questions that need to be answered when discussing miracles. These questions are:

  • What are miracles?
  • Do they occur?
  • Do they reveal God?
  • If so, what type of God do they reveal?

However, this essay asks us to mainly focus on the first two questions, what are miracles? And can they occur?

        David Hume, an 18th century atheistic philosopher, defined a miracle in the following way, ‘a transgression of a law of nature by a particular volition of a deity or by the interposition of some invisible agent’. Hume takes a transgression to mean a violation, and a law of nature to mean an action, which is repeated and therefore is predictable in nature. Most philosophers accept this definition today. Hume’s argument states that by definition it is difficult to see how a miracle would occur. However, it is important to notice that Hume never states that miracles are impossible.

        Hume believed in empirical evidence, which relies on the senses to tell us what is real. This approach occurred after the Enlightenment period and many empiricists therefore reject revelation as proof of a miracle. Hume states that it is impossible to prove that a miracle has happened because of the scientific methodology that he believes in. miracles can only be proved by the testimony of people who have been there and their after effects. However, this evidence does not fit in with Hume’s belief in scientific attitude. Hume states that for a miracle to be possible the violation of the law of nature would have to have the same strength of argument as that of the original hypothesis. He stated that laws of nature have been supported innumerably for hundreds of years and therefore the likelihood of this happening is minimal. It would be more probable that he miracle be false than that the evidence in favour of the law of nature be proved incorrect. Hume believes that there has never been a miracle seen by a sufficient number of people, to justify it enough. Those testifying to the miracle will have a natural tendency to suspend their reason and support the claim, argues Hume, as religionists would be enthusiasts and there is a tendency for co-religionists to support it too because they want to believe and they want their faith to be proved. Hume continues to state that miracles are only seen by illiterate people and are ‘observed chiefly to about among ignorant and barbarous nations’. Hume also states that as religions claim that a miracle will back up their particular faith then the problem comes when we look at differing religions that interpret miracles in different ways. He states that the differing religions cannot all be right and that not only does every miracle therefore destroy rival claims of miracles but also cancels themselves out. Therefore, it is clear from Hume’s point of view it would be very hard for a miracle to occur due to the definition he gives it and the argument he puts forward centring on his definition.

Join now!

        However, R. F. Holland defines a miracle in a contrasting way. He states that ‘a coincidence can be taken religiously as a sign and called a miracle’. Therefore, in Holland’s definition there is no violation of any laws of nature. It is instead, the interpretation of the event, which makes it a miracle. It is the meaning of the event to the believer that is linked to a set of religious beliefs. Holland used the example of a train driver and little boy. He makes the reader imagine a young boy strays onto a railway line into the path of ...

This is a preview of the whole essay